GAGDA JAKIR JUSAB vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP — 43/2026

Case under The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 16th March 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC

CNR: GJKT020001562026

Filing Number

43/2026

Filing Date

05-Jan-2026

Registration No

43/2026

Registration Date

05-Jan-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT BHUJ

Judge

2-Chief Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

16-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OF

Last updated 21-May-2026

FIR Details

FIR Number

11205042251278

Police Station

BHUJ CITY A DIVISION POLICE STATION - KACHCHH DISTRICT

Year

2025

Acts & Sections

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 497

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.GAGDA JAKIR JUSAB

    Adv. V K SANDH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Government of Gujarat Advocate - APP (Assistant Public Prosecutor)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhuj dismissed the criminal petition filed by the applicant seeking return of a Samsung Galaxy S3 Ultra mobile phone seized in FIR No. 278/15 at Bhuj Police Station. The court upheld the police's decision to send the device to FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) for examination and rejected the petition for return on the condition of re-submission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  7. 10-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  8. 09-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  9. 07-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  10. 06-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  11. 05-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  12. 02-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  13. 25-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  14. 24-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  15. 23-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  16. 21-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  17. 20-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  18. 19-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  19. 18-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  20. 17-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  21. 16-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  22. 13-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  23. 12-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  24. 11-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  25. 10-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  26. 09-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  27. 07-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  28. 05-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  29. 04-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  30. 03-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  31. 02-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  32. 31-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  33. 30-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  34. 29-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  35. 28-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  36. 12-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  37. 09-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Chief Judicial Magistrate

  38. 08-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  39. 05-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 43/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Chief Judicial Magistrate of Bhuj dismissed the criminal petition filed by the applicant seeking return of a Samsung Galaxy S3 Ultra mobile phone seized in FIR No. 278/15 at Bhuj Police Station. The court upheld the police's decision to send the device to FSL (Forensic Science Laboratory) for examination and rejected the petition for return on the condition of re-submission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case